UK - NATS Pay negotiations - latest rumours

[Vote NO]

O.K. so the reps walked out of the pay meeting last Friday, I'm pretty sure management consider that a good result, no negotiations mean no pay rise, which is exactly what they want.

As soon as you walk out you have lost the arguement. If this is the case our reps have a lot to learn. They should have held their ground and let management walk out

Any news on pay rise negotiations ?

[Scuzi]

Originally Posted by Vote NO

As soon as you walk out you have lost the arguement. If this is the case our reps have a lot to learn. They should have held their ground and let management walk out

Without knowing what was said or what went on in the meeting, it is not prudent to draw up such conclusions. I do hope the union are taking a very firm stance though. If we lose this "round" we're screwed quite badly for the forseeable future.

[Vote NO]

It would help if we at least heard something after 5 days. What happened to improved comms?

[ImnotanERIC]

people are living in dreamland if they think our union are capable (currently) of getting anywhere near last aug rpi.
You are also living in dreamland if you think that a) industrial action would ever even be put to the membership and
b) our membership would ever vote yes.

[man friday]

being one of nats Gib atcos we had a different pay deal over the past three years to the rest of the company.

Last year we got 3.3% ,a lower rise than the UK figure, the same was the case in the previous 2 years.

i'm willing to bet my bollocks that this year we'll be treated the same as the rest of the company for a change and get fcuk all too !!!

[Radarspod]

You are also living in dreamland if you think that a) industrial action would ever even be put to the membership and
b) our membership would ever vote yes.

I don't agree, I actually think that this time it is likely to. I voted YES to the pension changes as I believe it was (and still is) the right thing to have done. But now the management are properly taking the p*** and I actually feel strongly enough that if it came to ballot I would be out there with everyone else (where can I buy a donkey jacket??), and I am often accused of being a company man!!. If I feel that strongly, then there is most likely a considerable amount of the membership like me who feel the same if nor more strongly that something needs to be done, especially those who were against the pension changes.

Vote NO - if it goes to a ballot, will you be changing your name?

RS

[Vote NO]

I will change it to "Give me a pay rise"

[Quincy M.E.]

Communication or lack there of

Sorry Ive not been on prune for ages and cant be bothered to read through 22 pages (!) but has anyone mentioned that the company has mentioned nothing about there even being any talks?

What the fnck is NATS Net for if not something like this? The only reason I know that they are taking place is because the union let me know. My collegues who are not in the union have no idea what is going on. I have spoken to HR and they just fob me off and have also ignored emails I have sent to them.

[45 before POL]

Nats net is for management to put out their own stories as they wish, spin spin spin

[rumouroid]

Natsnet is also where if you put something controversial that management don't like you get one of those yellow messages from Starbucks command, and if you're really lucky you get an invite to meet Barron for him to personally brainwash you, as happened to some people over the pension proposal comments on the natsnet.
Anything less then August 2008 RPI of 4.8% is a saving for NATS towards its £45 million, as it's charges increased by this amount because they are also based on the August RPI. So if NATS give us a 4% pay rise they can claim a saving of 0.8%, which equates to about £3 million.
Sounds like a fair compromise to me, I'd vote yes to 4%, anyone else?

[45 before POL]

But a payfreeze would allow them to give the 4.8% to their shareholders in dividends at least we might get a payrise of a couple of quid in divi payments....coffee anyone???

[rumouroid]

One more scary thing I forgot to mention that I heard at work today from a Prospect rep, at the pay meeting last Friday NATS are already bleating again that they can't afford the NEW pension proposal costs, inparticular NSL can't pay the necessary contributions to support it. Bye, Bye NSL.
So expect some more propaganda on the natsnet about taking a pay freeze, which equates to a 4.8% pay cut, to save the NEW pension scheme.
Since the "yes" vote on the first pension proposal, the scheme is a sitting duck for management to chip away at, along with all our other terms and conditions. I still find it hard to believe "we" voted yes, I can sort of understand the admin staff who don't have the job security that ATCO's do, but why on earth would 60% of ATCO's have voted yes? I'll never fathom that out.

[Jungle Jingle Jim]

I guess if you have lived in cloud cuckooland for the last 15 years the Red Barron would scare you to death into voting yes!

I voted NO and I still await the memorandum, or was that a LIE?

The problem that I have is that I did not believe the pension hype by management last year, so I damned well will not believe anything else that appears from NATSNet or the lips of the Red Man's lips!

I know NSL is in MELTDOWN, but that is a senior management issue. There is the sword, now go and do the sensible thing LH!

I do not trust Prospect either whom I personally believe fell under the Barron's pension deficit spell!

Lawrence and Paul are best buddies, just remember that folks!

And to the YES voters, don't moan when more of your T's & C's are eliminated!

I will forgo a pay rise if NATS pays NIL dividend.

Strange how within CTCland, folk with numerous years of service are being accepted for voluntary redundancy, whilst those with fewer years are not? Could I be wrong in suspecting that NATS wants the huge pay offs to reduce its underline profit for 80-09?

Staff are walking with 2-3 years salary, when others that applied with 2-3 year service are being declined.

If those that are walking are being subsidised by early retirement via our pension scheme, those that vote YES need medical assistance! Can our scheme cope with this additional cost?

[PeltonLevel]

Sorry to pour cold water on the conspiracy theorists

I voted NO and I still await the memorandum, or was that a LIE?

I don't know how good communications is in your section, but I received an NTUS update today (Friday), which stated:
"The MOU has now been signed by all parties and this will be available shortly on the NTUS web site on NATS Intranet."

If those that are walking are being subsidised by early retirement via our pension scheme, those that vote YES need medical assistance! Can our scheme cope with this additional cost?

As far as I am aware, all VR offers are cash based - no-one is even being offered early access to the 40-year rule. I think that the aim is to burn off some of the 2008/09 profits to minimise the tax paid. I believe that all agreements have to be signed before the end of March so that any compensation payments made can be accrued this financial year.

[BDiONU]

Originally Posted by rumouroid

Natsnet is also where if you put something controversial that management don't like you get one of those yellow messages from Starbucks command,

Its only recently that they've started to impose the rules you now sign up to before you make a response. If your message gets edited you've no one to blame but yourself for being stupid. If management really didn't want to hear responses then they wouldn't have provided the opportunity to allow everyone to write in, or they'd have removed it after a short period. I think its very telling that this communications opportunity exists.

and if you're really lucky you get an invite to meet Barron for him to personally brainwash you, as happened to some people over the pension proposal comments on the natsnet.

You mean those people who were full of p1ss and vinegar but didn't have the balls to speak to PB personally? Or do you mean those who wrote libelous comments (about DB9's etc) thinking they could hide behind the anonymity of the internet and get away with it? I thought it showed the mans committment that he is prepared, as the CEO of a major company, to make time to see people who seem particularly hard of understanding and try and better inform them.

Sounds like a fair compromise to me, I'd vote yes to 4%, anyone else?

I would if there was any chance of that being on the table. Given the recent sackings of some high powered managers, the redundancies and the letting go of 50% of contractors I somehow doubt there will be a reasonable pay offer.

BD

[throw a dyce]

Well the only time I had the balls to speak to Mr B,I came in on a day off,no Toil.His opening gambit was he believed that ATCOs were 20% overpaid,to the lowest paid in Nats.He then played some music,and then spent half the time in the corridor on the mobile,as if he really couldn't give a stuff.Came across a bit CJ ish to me.I didn't get where I am today without talking about trains.Not bad for someone with a 13% pay rise,flash car allegedly,and a thirst for screwing the staff to boost his bonus.
LH I do not understand what he says.Had the chance to spend half an hour with a universal translator,but hey I got better things to do on my responsibilty free break.
Everyone in NERL and NSL should be given the chance of VR.Probably get flattened by the stampede,if the shares pay out is anything to go by.

[PH-UKU]

NATS high standards

[QUOTE][they could hide behind the anonimity of the internet /QUOTE]

Personally I think NATS should have a zero tolernace policy toward sloppy spelling, sloppy html, and grammer).

If you cant spell propperly (or use Spellchecker) you should be sacked - instantlly !

Next?












(obviously this doesn't need to apply to operational staff )

[Geffen]

grammar....

[beaver liquor]

tolerance...

[anotherthing]

BD

you wrote:

I would if there was any chance of that being on the table. Given the recent sackings of some high powered managers, the redundancies and the letting go of 50% of contractors I somehow doubt there will be a reasonable pay offer.

The thing is, the managers are being replaced, the posts still exist.

The redundancies - some would say that we have been running overstaffed in some areas for some time.

Contractors - see above (notwithstanding that getting rid of contractors is an easy option for NATS - means they don't have to pay redundancy, and they don't have to advertise the fact that we are making so many redundancies. The fact it may be a knee jerk reaction ridding us of people we actually need is another matter)